Quick Grading Question

[scour]

hey guys, i have a newb question.   

Do printer / ink "flaws" affect the value of a poster?  For example, the background of a poster is printed with solid blue or black ink and there is a white spot / speck.  Like something was on the printer roller when it printed the poster and missed a spot.  I'm not referring to spots in a solid background caused by bends, wrinkles or whatever from external damage.  Does that make sense? 

[CSM]

Generally I would say "no" unless the defect is extremely noticeable, in some way detracts from the aesthetic qualities of the poster or if someone is willing to pay more for a copy with no apparent printing defect

[CSM]

To add to this, in my experience, I find that a lot of posters that are found in apparent unused condition exist because a whole batch had some level of a printing defect and were put aside or taken by the printer employees!  So we can actually be thankful those errors occurred, otherwise the posters would no longer be extant for us to enjoy.

Immediate examples are the RKO daybills for Cry Danger (a red ink smudge near Powell's face) and Where Danger Lives (many copies are printed slightly out of register).

So in this example, the 'values' on these posters are basically all the same because they all have the same or very similar printing defects and of course they are all that remain...  

[scour]

thanks for the speedy response, Chris.  That's where my train of thought was but wanted to get others opinions.  Others can still feel free to chime in. 

[erik1925]

I think it depends too, on how much of a "purist" a collector is and whether they want a "defective copy" or not. If all known copies have the same flaw, that is one thing. But if there copies of the same poster with defects and those without, I would think the copies with smudges, missing ink, white areas etc (areas that were not printed correctly) would sell for less.